Just responding to your post.

I can see where they coud possibly become collectors items if they are then taken off the packs.People collect everything.

Saying those already smoking get a kick out of them. Well consider the source. Already addicted what can they say?

Is it an appropriate means to curb smoking? I do not agree with it at all. Someone manufacturing a product should not be punished in such a way as to advertise their product in such a bad light. I do however go along with the warning labels on tobacco products.

Black Market in cigarettes. ANS: It already exists because cigarettes are legal to be smoked in public discounting non smoking areas. So when doing so it is peerfectly legal. You wil not see people smoking weed in public...well for the most part.

Would new smokers still seek out cigarettes then, absolutely. Why do you say that? Would they just do it in order to break the law? Remember they are not addicted at this point, being a new smoker or never having smoked before.


Also, arent most new smokers swatting "underage?" Meaning it already is "banned" for them. They're still smoking. ANS: Of all the laws this is really one of the most dumb ever passed. I believe they are prohibited from "purchasing" tobacco products but not for pocessing them or consuming them. I am not sure about this. For the most part it hurts the seller as they have a lot more to lose than some 17 year old.

"Is it an appropriate means to curb smoking? I do not agree with it at all. Someone manufacturing a product should not be punished in such a way as to advertise their product in such a bad light. I do however go along with the warning labels on tobacco products."

How is this any different than other warming labels in principle?

As for new young smokers, they aren't addicted now, and it's illegal for them to buy them, so why are they starting smoking now?

In principle it is the same. Both are trying to deter people from smoking. How you accomplish that is a different story in this case. A picture is worth a thousand words.

Lets understand something here. I am all for banning smoking altogether and am a non smoker. But until it is illegal to smoke in the U.S. we must live with it in designated areas. Should car makers be forced to show crash scenes in their showrooms of their automobiles? Should they be forced to show how one can be disabled and lose arms and legs and their lives in a car crash, show the victims in hospitals, show famlies at funerals after a fatal crash? Well in your theory it would seem so. Don't you find that theory flawed somewhat?

As for your second question. Because they can. They can get cigarettes any time they want them and there is no law preventing them from smoking them.